SIT excerpts reveal facts are different from what is made to be believed – Part 3

---

Kartikeya Tanna26 Dec 2013

 

SIT REPORT – Section 3

REPORT ON SANJEEV BHATT’S LIES AND HALF-TRUTHS

The critical difference between the SIT desiring to close the case through its closure report against CM and Amicus Curiae’s conclusion that CM should be prosecuted is the testimony of Sanjeev Bhatt. We examine his testimony and his lies in this Section 3.

1. Sanjiv Bhatt claims that after the meeting at CM’s residence on night of 27 February, he issued several messages to police and IB. Surprisingly, he tells everyone, but not his own head G.C. Raigar



2. To buttress his claim that he attended the meeting, he has produced a letter dated 27th February which references the meeting held by CM



3. Two problems: this letter is not marked to the ADGP (Intelligence) as was the prevalent practice. Secondly, compare the initials of Bhatt’s senior OP Mathur (‘M’) in the above-referenced letter to the letter written on 28-02-2002



4. A closer look at the two initials. Any doubt that the two initials are markedly different?


5. Sanjiv Bhatt says he attended office next day (in Gandhinagar) which has been denied by Raiger and contradicted by his phone records



6. Sanjiv Bhatt says he attended the second meeting at CM’s residence with his boss GC Raiger on 28 February at 10:30 AM.



7. Sanjiv Bhatt says he then returned to Police Bhavan at 11 AM and saw Ashok Bhatt and IK Jadeja in his chamber



Just to reiterate the last three points, Sanjiv Bhatt says that on February 28, 2002, he went to his office in Gandhinagar at 10 AM, to CM’s residence for the meeting at 10:30 AM and then back to his office at 11 AM where he saw two ministers

8. Except that his phone call records on 28-02-2002 show that he was in Ahmedabad at least until 11 AM. For him to reach Gandhinagar at that time would take a minimum of 20 minutes, if not more.



9. Sanjiv Bhatt claims he attended the meeting as a “Staff Officer to the DGP or Addl DG (Int.)” whereas there was no such post



10. Sanjiv Bhatt claimed that he had accompanied DGP K. Chakravarthi to CM’s residence for the 27th February meeting. That is contradicted by entry by DGP in his staff car log book



11. How Sanjiv Bhatt coerced his AIO Shri KD Panth into giving a statement on the same lines as him



12. KD Panth filed a police complaint that Bhatt influenced, threatened, detained and pressurized him to sign an affidavit containing false facts



13. Bhatt also harassed and threatened another person – Shri Shailesh Raval – compelling him to admit that Bhatt had attended the 27th February meeting. Raval complained to the SIT



14. A driver constable – Tarachand Yadav – supported Bhatt’s version. However, among many things he confirmed, he also confirmed that on 28th February, Bhatt reached Police Bhavan at 9 AM!



15. As stated earlier, Bhatt’s call records show his location to be in Ahmedabad till 11 AM!



16. Sanjiv Bhatt cannot satisfactorily answer why he did not allege what he is doing now for 10 long years



17. Some emails have surfaced in the meanwhile which show various things as under:
(a)



(b)

(c)


(d)


(e)



(f)


And the most incriminating of them all………………..
(g)

• 
If Shri Modi is prosecuted under this complaint, the process of trial takes several years. He will be expected to resign. He may also have to make frequent trips to give his testimony. All this, merely on the basis of a statement by a disgruntled former IPS officer? Surely, the Amicus Curiae should have known better when he differed in his opinion.

Source: Niticentral